Invited reviews

We operate a programme that commissions reviews from leading authors around the world and across a range of subjects. We invite the submission of reviews on a particular topic and, in some instances, will even suggest a structure for the review that the authors should follow when writing their review.

Publication processing fee

These invited reviews are submitted in the normal way via our website and are exempted from paying any publication processing fee.

Editorial decision-making

Our long-standing policy has been not to let editorial decision-makers know which papers are invited and which are submitted spontaneously. Our view has always been that editorial decision-makers should not have their view clouded either for or against a paper simply because it has been invited. Good papers should be accepted and bad papers rejected irrespective of their source. As a result some invited reviews will be rejected.

Manuscripts are subject to same checks as all other manuscripts

All invited reviews that come to us are subject to all the same checks that every paper goes through. These are:

Authors and their affiliations are checked;

Conflicts of Interest information is sought for all authors;

CrossCheck antiplagiarism software is used to check for re-use of materials;

External peer-review with a minimum of two comprehensive sets of narrative comments and two numerical scores are required;

The editorial decision-maker, often the Editor-in-Chief, will review the submitted manuscript, peer-reviewer comments and scores, and Conflict of Interest declarations before making their first editorial decision.

After first editorial review

Many manuscripts will require to be modified in order to address points raised by peer-reviewers or suggested by editorial decision-makers. It is not a case of having to address all the points raised. Rather we require that the author provide us with a revised manuscript and a point-by-point response to the points raised. If authors disagree with individual points or feel that they are misguided they should detail this in their point-by-point response.

The editorial decision-maker who reviewed the submission at first editorial review will subsequently receive the revised manuscript and the point-by-point covering letter and make a decision. This may be to reject the paper, return it to peer-reviewers for further consideration, or return it to the author directly for further points to be addressed. They may also make the decision to accept the paper for publication.

In order to provide our website visitors and registered users with a service tailored to their individual preferences we use cookies to analyse visitor traffic and personalise content. You can learn about our use of cookies by reading our Privacy Policy. We also retain data in relation to our visitors and registered users for internal purposes and for sharing information with our business partners. You can learn about what data of yours we retain, how it is processed, who it is shared with and your right to have your data deleted by reading our Privacy Policy.

If you agree to our use of cookies and the contents of our Privacy Policy please click 'accept'.